dbeck,,,what a load of crap,,,I dont believe the magazines are biased,,,they kiss butt to everyone equally,,,,if any of you have ever read a bike review in Motocross action (dirtbike mag) you would see what honest jounalism is,,,,they tell it like it is,,,no matter if it offends a manufacturer or not,,,,Dirt Wheels are the biggest wimps in the industry, they never say anything bad or derogatory,,even if said product or bike sucks,,,and dont tell me there are not crappy quads out,,cause there are,,,,modern quads are a joke,,,we get no real R&D (especiall compared to dirt bikes) bikes from the 80's are as good and better than brand new bikes,,,,,nothing against the Raptor, 400ex, or DS but those bikes are crap compared to a 426, RC 450, or any KTM 4 stroke,,,,the mags need to start telling it like it is instead of sugar coating everything,,,,reach down, grab hold, and take a stand,,,I did ,,,I cancelled all my subsciptions

 

That's interesting. Our research says that the primary source of ATV information for most people is now the Internet. So apparently you're not alone in cancelling your subscriptions! I do believe that our forums are the best source of ATV information anywhere. Because the combined experience and knowledge of the 15,000 people who use the forums is significant. It's all of you who use the forums that really contribute a lot of information to the general pool of ATV knowledge.

I can't speak to the other magazine's policies. All I can relate is my personal experience with the other editors and that's what I based my comments upon.

 

dbeck...this is one dance you may have been better sitting out. You almost had me convinced then you added your addendum. I will take you at your word that the writers you are familiar with have the utmost integrity, but I cannot see anywhere that any writer even with as little as an hour on a machine cannot find blazing examples of vehicle flaw. Even when writers say something like "I didn't like the exact position of the highbeam switch on this quad" they are really not getting to the meat of the issue. As a whole the performance, fit and finish of the "modern" quad is stagnant at best! I am only going to speak to the quad I have; a 99 Banshee. I have been back into quadding for not even a year after 15 years out of the sport. The quads are esentially unchanged. Are they more durable, faster, cheaper [same old machines been pumping the same quads out for over a decade, the machines gotta be paid for by now]? The answer is NO! I'm sure that there is significant competition between magazines and therefore magazine A is not gonna put up a stink that the Banshee still has a lousy frame, the same motor, and the worlds most rediculous chain tightener ever imagined; while magazine B says the grips on the Banshee aren't the greatest but the rest of it kicks all other quads butts! What manufacturer is gonna spend their money on a mag that rips them for having done nothing for the consumer? I can't think of one.
Just to give you an idea how starved the public is for a new, reliable, attractive quad think of this... why would someone spend 35 bucks on a shiney brake reservoir cover? because everyone else has the same cookie cutter quad as everyone else. Why would someone spend 600+ dollars for new A arms? because Yamaha is still putting the same old tinfoil ones on the new quads they had on 'em when they first came out. Why haven't the magazines made it a point to show that this stuff isn't worth that kind of money? Because they take money from the guys that sell this overpriced aftermarket stuff too. And the accessories sell mags as much as the full page manufacturers ads do.
I guess the readers should know better. When they talk about a new quad that's coming out, they call it a "review". In a few more years I will be able to walk into a dealer and buy a new Banshee for my kid that is just like mine that is just like the one my dad had and his father and his father and his father...and I'm sure the magazines will say it's the kick buttnest thing out, until the next issue.

 

I agree with holyman. Why has there been so little development in quads? 20 years ago I raced motocross and if you didn't have a new bike every year you were getting passed by. The manufacturers keep giving us the same old stuff year after year. Blasters and Banshees have been unchanged since Reagan was in office, thats a long time folks. How much more are we paying now than then? Not to just pick on Yamaha because all the big companies have been slow to improve our rides. When I started looking for a quad I expected some major advancements over 10 to 15 year old machines, not just in the prices. As you can see by my sig. I didn't get a technological barnstormer because I couldn't see paying 6 grand for a toy.

 

"That's interesting. Our research says that the primary source of ATV information for most people is now the Internet."

Well of course it is, when you ask an Internet guy.

 

Greetings,

Cstark makes an interesting point -- there really aren't that many ads for quads in the magazines. If you look at Successful Farming or Progressive Farmer magazine, you'll find a full page ad from each major manufacturer nearly every month. DirtWheels et al actually have a lot fewer such ads. And Honda usually runs an ad for "Stupid Hurts" instead of using the space for an ATV.

 

Most successful magazines make there money off of adverisers. The subscribers is just bonus money.

You KNOW that money DOES bias these magazines. Then again what does money NOT bias? NOTHING

:O

 

Of course they're biased. All media is.

 

I guess it's a matter of preaching to the choir. If you've already got people that are gonna buy your goods why tell them again to buy your goods? This even adds to the suspicion that alot of the rediculuosly good reviews are from under the table arrangements. A quad magazine is not gonna be picked up by some middle aged housewife in the burbs just so she can check it out. A person that buys the mag is either hoping against hope that something new is really coming out [like they make you think on the cover]or is looking for an aftermarket suppliers address to make a purchase.
How often to they do product by product comparisons on quads in the farming mags? I would think not often if ever. So a manufacturer has to get their name out there or get buried by the competition.
The quad mags have the manufacturers on each cover! How could you ask for better advertising?! And each issue tells how much better than last issue the quads are getting.
I'd really like to know about the test riders too. What kind of quads do they actually personally own? If they don't actually own their own quad then they can't be trusted to give an accurate assessment of a quad any more than a parking lot car jockey can evaluate cars.

I have another challenge for the powers that be of this forum...
If you really want to know what we think about our quads then add another page that will allow us to post our problems that we have with our own quads so that manufacturers [that supposedly read these from time to time] can see in detail what's going on.
To avoid overlap and brand bashing a person would have to indicate a certain amount of the VIN of their vehicle [ie last 5 digits] when posting. And you could add a page that lists product recalls [as if] showing the great integrity of the manufacturers.
This, I think, would help us all get some of the real world problems with our quads out in the open, all listed concisely in one place, and help the manufacturers live up to the promise that they imply, namely, concern for their beloved customers. This way when I go to buy a quad I can look at the problems page and do a search for Banshees, read all the problems, then look to the recall page and see what Yamaha has done about it BEFORE I make a purchase!
What do you say dbeck?

 

I would like to say that I have been in the ATV industry since 1985. My first quad was a Suzuki 185 Quadrunner.
Now, how can you sit there and tell me that ATV's don't get any R&D. This ATV had a solid rear axle/swingarms. So, there was no rear suspension. It had about 3" of travel in the front. It was an air cooled motor. It ran about an 8" front tire and an 22" rear. This thing had terrible understeering. But I loved every minute on it. Look what we ride today compared to that. 500cc Liquid cooled auto tranny, 8" of suspension travel, fully independent suspension, selectable 2wd/4wd, and electric start. If that isn't R&D then what is???

The Utility ATV Market has out sold the motorcycle industry for many years now. That's where the R&D money is spent. Todays utility ATV is light years ahead compared to my first quad.

The reasons you still haven't seen the improvements in the sport side is not because of the manufactures. It was because of us!! It was an agreement between the manufactures and the CPSC (consumer protection safety council). This agreement came about from all of the lame asses that went out and bought a sport quad. On there way to the dunes they picked up a few 12 packs and left their riding gear home. When they were killed or severly maimed because of their lack of intellegence. They turned to their trusty lawyer to make them feel better with lots of money from the ATV manufacture, land owner, or who ever else they could blame.

In addition to this we had the news media trying to keep their ratings. So they sent out very uninformed news reporters (Barbara Walters, and others like her) to do a story about the dangers of ATV's. Her highly edited and highly biased films hit the national primetime tv screen. Many people paniced and refused to allow their children ride on such dangerous machines, called their senator and congressman and demanded action.

From the sharp increase in accidents, news coverage, and elected officials seeking another term. The CPSC came out and banned the sale of three wheelers and put a moritorium on the production of new sport ATV's. It has only been recently that this moritorium has been lifted. That's why you see the increase in new sport quads today.

Trust me, big brother is watching to see if we can handle ourselves with these new machines adorned with all the red and yellow warning stickers, reminding us of the days of old!!!!

Like dave said they have tested and retested the same sport quads over and over. Why keep bashing the "old news", it doesn't sell. To sale things they have to come up with new things to say about an old bike. Thats why Dave said they have to be creative in their testing!!! Finding ways to keep the reader interested and their subscriptions numbers up.

The thing I was dissappointed to see dave say was that these test riders didn't know much about ATV's and because of their lack of experience and knowledge couldn't truely test a machine with only a few hours of seat time. So, the reason we get crappy unenlightening reviews is from lack of knowledge and experience by the test rider!!!! maybe they ought to find someone more experienced in riding to do the reviews???

Whoever mentioned the fact the dirt bike mags tell it like it is and ATV mags don't. Well, to burst your bubble they are owned by the same company!!!!! So, are you saying that the company would try and increase it sales in one division and not another???? That makes a lot of business sense there!!!! (sarcasim intended) [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img].

You are right about the manufacture has recouped its R&D costs from the old sport bikes they just haven't recouped the money from all the law suits filed against them!!! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

Well, thats my two cents!!!